The Supreme Court, the nation’s highest judicial institution, has recently faced quite a lot of public scrutiny.
And surprisingly, Justice Amy Coney Barrett has spoken out in support of it, rather than against, exclaiming that she has “thick skin” to take it.
She noted that although there can be good and bad with increased attention on the court, increased knowledge about the court’s work is is a positive development.
The downside however is when there are misperceptions about what the high court does or if people feel let down by its decisions.
“Justices and all judges are public figures, and public criticism kind of comes with the job,” she said.
She reminded everyone that only a couple years ago she was teaching law at University Notre Dame far from any attention or criticism but now as a Supreme Court justice her experiences have made her thick-skinned to endure it.
When Amy Coney Barrett was nominated for Supreme Court Justice by former President Donald Trump even Democrats did not expect much from her confirmation process due to its foregone conclusion based on party lines.
However, earlier this year Democrats were forced into treating nominee Jackson differently than previous appointments when they released her autobiography titled “Lovely One” which detailed her journey as not just an African American woman but also one who rose through courts ranks to become a high-profile figure in law enforcement.
Her book got glowing reviews from Democrats alike including media outlets which prompted many political observers to question why Ketanji Brown Jackson wasn’t treated like Amy Coney Barrett?
Even when Barrett signed a book deal with Penguin Random House —the same publisher as Justice Jackson—the treatment couldn’t be more different.
Media outlets such as Ann Marimow and Emma Brown alleged that Barrett’s financial disclosures were suspiciously timed during “a tense moment for the court” while Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick charged that breaking some rule had occurred despite no evidence being presented.
Chicago Tribune’s Timothy O’Brien went further saying it proved “Supreme Court ethics problems”.
Hundreds of employees at Penguin Random House even signed an open letter demanding cancellation of her deal yet executives refused to back down due presumably partisan politics playing role in the decision making process rather than actual facts surrounding the case itself.
This is something which could have been avoided if they’d simply treated both women fairly without input from outside sources.
